RE: Who is Caloric Restriction?

[Guest guest]

Hi :

As Francesca says: " ................ we just don't really know what

is optimum for humans " .

AT THE MOMENT NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE.

There are studies showing considerable lifespan extension in animals

from restricting caloric intake while maintaining nutrition. But

doing equivalent studies in humans will take the best part of a

century and would need a very large groups of subjects. So we still

do not know **for sure** that there **is** a significant benefit for

humans, let alone what precise degree of restriction provides the

greatest benefit (if there is one).

What you can do is treat those who have been on CRON for a number of

years as the canaries in the coal mine. In terms of degree of

restriction one way you can do that is to look at a table Francesca

put in the 'Database' at this site, called " BMI & WC/H info " . From

that table you will see who is already established at a CRON level,

and who is only part way there.

Then look at your own measures of WC/H; BMI; and BF% and compare them

with the rest of us. You probably would be well advised to make sure

you are not at or below the extreme low end as indicated by any of

the three measures.

But still, even after saying that ..... AT THE MOMENT NO ONE KNOWS.

One study posted just recently showed that fatter people who exercise

have fewer heart attacks than thinner people who exercise. This is

far from being a precise science.

Rodney.

>

> >

> > (Question) Francesca says 15%, others try 30% but how do you work

> > out the norm you are taking that percentage off.

> >

> > I am five foot eleven and can keep a steady BMI of 18.5 on 1500

> > calories, so that is a 40% reduction on say 2500 cals (presuming

> > 2500 is the norm for a male my height) which would seem okay, but

> > very low. But some studies that get trumpeted in popular press

say

> > 3000 calories is more the norm these days, in which case I would

be

> > doing 50% CR and therefore that would be to low, so which is it ?.

> >

> > When I try to work out my set point and then my target weight

> > via " beyond 120 year diet " I get 134 pounds which is roughly my

> > weight now.

> >

> > ...

[Guest guest]

I agree with your call for moderation.

There have already been multiple explanations offered for the apparent

disparity in the heart attack study you keep citing. Data doesn't lie, but

conclusions can hinge on assumptions that may be flawed. Unstated inferences

aren't even wrong, they just aren't.

JR

-----Original Message-----

From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...]

Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 10:47 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: Who is Caloric Restriction?

Hi :

As Francesca says: " ................ we just don't really know what

is optimum for humans " .

AT THE MOMENT NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE.

But still, even after saying that ..... AT THE MOMENT NO ONE KNOWS.

One study posted just recently showed that fatter people who exercise

have fewer heart attacks than thinner people who exercise. This is

far from being a precise science.

Rodney.

>

> >

> > (Question) Francesca says 15%, others try 30% but how do you work

> > out the norm you are taking that percentage off.

> >

> > I am five foot eleven and can keep a steady BMI of 18.5 on 1500

> > calories, so that is a 40% reduction on say 2500 cals (presuming

> > 2500 is the norm for a male my height) which would seem okay, but

> > very low. But some studies that get trumpeted in popular press

say

> > 3000 calories is more the norm these days, in which case I would

be

> > doing 50% CR and therefore that would be to low, so which is it ?.

> >

> > When I try to work out my set point and then my target weight

> > via " beyond 120 year diet " I get 134 pounds which is roughly my

> > weight now.

> >

> > ...

[Guest guest]

Hi JR:

Hopefully it is understood that I cited that study because it was

posted here very recently (i.e. readily accessible) and to show that

in studies relating to nutrition you will rarely find ANYTHING that

is absolutely cut-and-dried, or is not disputed by data from at least

one study on the other side of the argument.

And CR science at present, I submit, is an even less precise than

some other aspects of nutrition.

I personally do not believe that in general fatter people have fewer

heart attacks than thinner people. And that was not my point in

quoting it. Does this clarify the matter?

Rodney.

> >

> > >

> > > (Question) Francesca says 15%, others try 30% but how do you

work

> > > out the norm you are taking that percentage off.

> > >

> > > I am five foot eleven and can keep a steady BMI of 18.5 on 1500

> > > calories, so that is a 40% reduction on say 2500 cals (presuming

> > > 2500 is the norm for a male my height) which would seem okay,

but

> > > very low. But some studies that get trumpeted in popular press

> say

> > > 3000 calories is more the norm these days, in which case I would

> be

> > > doing 50% CR and therefore that would be to low, so which is

it ?.

> > >

> > > When I try to work out my set point and then my target weight

> > > via " beyond 120 year diet " I get 134 pounds which is roughly my

> > > weight now.

> > >

> > > ...

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

thanks all,

so you'd be about 28yo? > age 34 now, did cr for years on 2000 cals

haveing read a Walford book in mid 1990s, but started to gain weight

due to change of walking habits and therefore restricted cals to

1500 to get weight down again and got a slightly lower bmi than was

used to, so now wondering whether i've gone too far (sounds like I

am a bit on the low side), but I only get one of the main side

effects (lower libido), don't feel cold ever, always been warm,

don't feel too bony, never get irritable and feel fine except for a

food allergy/intolerance (trying Rodneys starch removel idea and

getting very good results so far).

There is no way I am going lower body weight or calories less than

this. My bmi did drop to 17.9 at one point and I suddenly

discovereed ribs I never realised I had, that frightened me back up

to 18.5.

richard ...

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From:

below

I agree with your call for moderation.There have already been multiple explanations offered for the apparentdisparity in the heart attack study you keep citing. Data doesn't lie, butconclusions can hinge on assumptions that may be flawed. Unstated inferencesaren't even wrong, they just aren't.JRI wish I had written that. Much of which "everybody" seems to "know" on the cr list stems from inferences drawn but not corroborated.

But, Rae says what we do know quite clearly: calories! Calories! calories! So how many calories?

Determine the average calories consumed by persons of your height and sex. Use that as a starting point. Add calories for exercise. Cut about 500 calories. Find out what happens to your body. Notice how you feel. Be sure to get all of your nutrients from your diet most days. Begin light exercise. Keep upper, middle, and lower body exercise aerobic.

Why? Because this is the kind of exercise most "longevous" people do as part of their lifestyles. They walk. They dig.

They lift things. They often do moderate exercises. Notice how you feel. If you feel good after a few months of staying with your program and your weight loss has leveled off, why...see if you can cut a few more calories (notice that the weight loss is not really the point, it is the calorie reduction) and see if you feel pretty good doing that. Your energy should be up, not down.

You should feel good...or what the heck's the point? At age 72 I don't feel perfect, but I do feel good and I often feel terrific. The closer I stay to myprogram the better I feel. Maybe you will too. So, don't pay too much attention to the myth builders. Find our for yourself what works with your body. You have three parameters you can depend on, although these, too, are largely inferrential. You can cut calories below the average for your size. You can be sure to get most of the known nutrients most days. You can get regular, moderate exercise. How much? Work til you feel good, not til you're beat up. Just do it regularly.

Is Vegan, lacato ovo vegetarian, low animal protein, high protein, high fat, low fat best? Hell, I don't know. I've tried them all, and all I know is what's best for me, and that's taken a few years to determine. But this I know. You're supposed to feel good.

Ed

.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

>

> What you can do is treat those who have been on CRON for a number

> of years as the canaries in the coal mine.

Hi All,

.... or the canaries in the gold mine.

Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

Hi Al:

LOL.

Of course I meant a very well run and properly ventiliated coal mine!

And anyway we already have a whole lot of 'canary

proxies' ....... the fruit flies, nematodes, spiders, mice, rats

and monkeys, in addition to the likes of a few here who have been on

CRON for a long time.

(But I would still like to see the details of the study in which the

mice on a too-extreme version of CRON died sooner than those in the

control group ........ if anyone can locate it. Also do we know

the details of the degree of restriction in the monkey study? And

the age at onset of restriction?)

Rodney.

> >

> > What you can do is treat those who have been on CRON for a number

> > of years as the canaries in the coal mine.

>

> Hi All,

>

> ... or the canaries in the gold mine.

>

> Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

Keep tweeting, so we know you're OK..... :-)

JR

-----Original Message-----

From: old542000 [mailto:apater@...]

Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:32 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Who is Caloric Restriction?

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

>

> What you can do is treat those who have been on CRON for a number

> of years as the canaries in the coal mine.

Hi All,

.... or the canaries in the gold mine.

Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

Hi all,

30%, I believe, was the major sudy. They were I thought started at

the age classically used on mice, after puberty. Results so far are

encouraging.

Cheers, Al Pater.

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

>

> control group ........ if anyone can locate it. Also do we know

> the details of the degree of restriction in the monkey study? And

> the age at onset of restriction?)

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

I toght I taw a putty tat.

Cheers, Al.

> >

> > What you can do is treat those who have been on CRON for a number

> > of years as the canaries in the coal mine.

>

> Hi All,

>

> ... or the canaries in the gold mine.

>

> Cheers, Al Pater.

[Guest guest]

I would think you are about as CRed as I would ever want to be. According to the harris benedict equation you should be losing weight, but you're not, so apparently somehow you have achieved some efficiency like maybe you're colder?.

regards

----- Original Message -----

From: rwalkerad1970

Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:06 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Who is Caloric Restriction?

thanks all,so you'd be about 28yo? > age 34 now, did cr for years on 2000 cals haveing read a Walford book in mid 1990s, but started to gain weight due to change of walking habits and therefore restricted cals to 1500 to get weight down again and got a slightly lower bmi than was used to, so now wondering whether i've gone too far (sounds like I am a bit on the low side), but I only get one of the main side effects (lower libido), don't feel cold ever, always been warm, don't feel too bony, never get irritable and feel fine except for a food allergy/intolerance (trying Rodneys starch removel idea and getting very good results so far). There is no way I am going lower body weight or calories less than this. My bmi did drop to 17.9 at one point and I suddenly discovereed ribs I never realised I had, that frightened me back up to 18.5. richard ...